Now, I know that it's not definite whether she did or not, but anyone who has slept with Russell Brand in the past couple of years, ie since knowing that his schtick consists mainly of talking about all the muckiness he gets up to - well, you basically just signed a release form to be part of his act, didn't you? Sure as if you sleep with Leonard Cohen, there's likely to be a song about it by year's end.

And my point was precisely that no 'aspersions' have been cast. To talk in terms of 'aspersions' is to subscribe to terribly Victorian ideas that saying a lady has had extramarital sex is de facto an insult. I thought we were beyond that. If he'd gone into details of various scandalous and specific acts, then yes, you might have a case to answer. He didn't. He just said they'd had sex. In 2008, is that still scandalous? Really?

Now which arguments am I avoiding, exactly?